Clint Eastwood saves golf director from chocking It's been corrected now but it really did say chocking in the headline. The internet has led to some of the sloppiest journalism ever. A professional wordsmith should be more disciplined. There are endless examples but I digress ...

It's a really disturbing trend. Writing is a very specific type of language and needs to be learned and employed precisely. When you speak it is acceptable to code switch (i.e. switch dialects depending on whom you are talking to).

These sloppy mistakes in writing and the public's obliviousness will lead to more and more code switching being acceptable in writing. If the spelling is no longer important than jargon, slang, and dialect find their way into professional writing as well. The writer develops a false over-reaching sense of the readers ability to make sense of what he writes.

BTW, It took a long time for writing to develop the precision that it has today. It will likely be short lived and often striven for._________________ubi primum potero, me hinc subduco.

@porodzila: I've also wondered about swype and not needing to spell words correctly. This is more an extension of relying on spell-checkers and search engines to correct mistakes, but the pervasiveness seems to be greater with mobile platforms. With spell-checkers and search engines, it was more limited or more specific. With mobile usage, it is in more common dialogue.

Although, given some of the emails I've received, some people were already doomed. _________________You're jumping to conclusions, so I can't keep up with you. Go on without me, I'll just slow you down.

I've actually spent time thinking about this. When we think, we think in concepts expressed as either words or abstract ideals (numbers etc). If your language is sloppy. it follows that your thinking is sloppy. The greater and more accurate one's vocabulary is, the more accurate and deep their thinking has the potential to become._________________People Of Love

I've actually spent time thinking about this. When we think, we think in concepts expressed as either words or abstract ideals (numbers etc). If your language is sloppy. it follows that your thinking is sloppy. The greater and more accurate one's vocabulary is, the more accurate and deep their thinking has the potential to become.

I've actually spent time thinking about this. When we think, we think in concepts expressed as either words or abstract ideals (numbers etc). If your language is sloppy. it follows that your thinking is sloppy. The greater and more accurate one's vocabulary is, the more accurate and deep their thinking has the potential to become.

Double negatives have a long standing in spoken English. It is believed by some to be inherited from the French. I employee them in speech on occasion for emphasis or humor. English readers already accept these uses as grammatical in certain cases such as the representation of dialect or use in poetry. But the aim of these styles is to be broad and use as much of the language as possible for effect. The should never be acceptable for other uses._________________ubi primum potero, me hinc subduco.

Not nobody == sombody, for example. They allow you to more precisely narrow down on a subject not only from positive perspectives but also anti-negative perspectives, and I think that is not useless. _________________"History began on July 4,1776. Everything before that was a mistake." -Ron Swanson